Do you agree that Moral Truths are higher level or supersede Scientific truths/facts?

Example: you have two contradictory truths but you have to chose one.
- The scientific truth deals with the material world and so from your limited exposure and knowledge, it is a fact.
- But choosing the scientific factual truth leads to the extinction of human civilization.
- Whereas the moral Truth is more... show more Example: you have two contradictory truths but you have to chose one.

- The scientific truth deals with the material world and so from your limited exposure and knowledge, it is a fact.

- But choosing the scientific factual truth leads to the extinction of human civilization.

- Whereas the moral Truth is more true because the ultimate truth is that which serves life. Starting from an individual level, to the family, to the community, nation, and human civilization. That is evolution. That is the ultimate Truth. That is at the core of who we are. Every other truth branches out from that fundamental truth.

Do you agree?

Follow

20 answers 20

Report Abuse

Are you sure you want to delete this answer?

Sorry, something has gone wrong.

Trending Now

Answers

Best Answer: If one is focused upon "things of this world," and/or if a society is, it is arguable that what Gaston Bachelard termed "the coefficient of adversity" (later taken up by Sartre) is a determining factor in the dangers of technological empowerment.

In other words, character, human psychology, and morals are rather constant (e.g., the Greek and Shakespearean plays show character qualities constant over time). Thus, increasing technological empowerment combined with Greek and Shakespearean human character traits is worrisome, as the empowerment increases exponentially.

A characteristic of the so-called "Enlightenment" is an example of placing mankind as the center of value, rather than some Commandments of God. Moral constraints act to rein in typical human sinful nature, and insofar as increasing technological empowerment is not balanced by some type of Platonic "Republic" trained altruism and/or Confucian social moral harmonics and/or Maslow/Sorokin development, it is arguable that those who gain the material world of increasingly better gimcracks, bells, and whistles, tend toward "Enlightenment" "me first, maybe God in a corner" values. So far the Maslow/Sorokin programs are problematic, vis a vis societal handling of increasing techne power.

Thus, your axiom is historically justified.

Roger Scruton wrote a book on this lessening of Godly values among ruling powers ("An Intelligent Person's Guide to Modern Culture"), which recommended, in a contra-Nietzsche/Maslowian/Sorokinian positing, that humans live as Confucius ~ recommended, and as Plato recommended: apply the golden rule, the general values of categorical imperatives, traditional moralities (e.g. 10 Commandments) that have proved helpful over the millennia, even if one does not have the inner Child Oneness with the holy Father-Mother God.

So, moral truths are, for the Godly, transcendent; for societies in general, even such systems as the U.S. Constitution are very helpful when genuinely applied across the board. "Superiority" is less a consideration for the non-Godly, than Confucian praxis; good, fair moral systems work. Research into the rise and fall of Chinese dynasties confirms that, in any given dynasty, when the Confucian system of merit-based social mobility was corrupted by e.g. nepotism or bribery, within about two generations the excluded talented formed a basis for the rise of the next dynasty, even as the discontent of those excluded served to bring about the fall of the current dynasty.

.
Error in analogy, real is real, fake is fake, the moral of the story says, but the factors are,

If you walk into a volcano, you will go to a happy place to appease the imagination
If you avoid the dangers of lava pits, you live another day,

If you are wise you will stay here while I go and test all the apples on the tree, cause of being that apples may be poison, so you stay here and starve, while I go out and live another day .

Truths are not valid enough in mindsets that are predisposed to adults thinking, those allusions have cost humans billions of lives, and thousands of ages in loss time, those moral trues, are only valid for those that already figured out the facts of a volcano, or the survival of deception in which to manipulate the masses over a cliff whilst standing by with food in hand.

Things that are true do not contradict with other things that are true. Don't forget about the concept of degrees of freedom - meaning that not everything negates something else or affirms it. For instance, you can be short and hungry. Or tall and hungry. One doesn't impact the other. There can be physical truths and moral truths - we don't have to choose between them; they are not mutually exclusive.

No. Moral truth is subjective largely depending on culture, society, and law. Scientific truth is wholly objective based on robustly established knowledge, it has no inherent level or moral value in itself.

Any moral value of science relates to how the scientific truth is used within a culture, society, or in an attempt to objectify law. I would put any moral "truth" way down the scale based on the fact that it was a subjective unquantifiable judgement exercised by someone else, subject to review, and non universal.

Moral truths are established to control the actions of others. Contrast USA and Russia, or UK and China, or the more controversial moral issues of pro life or gun control, there seem to be some differences of opinion

Any science that helps human beings is more useful than science that harms human beings. That doesn’t require deep moral insight. It is virtually self-evident and as such could be considered scientific EVEN THOUGH IT IS A PART OF THE MORAL REALM. I don’t think that science works without the moral dimension but morality certainly works without science. Does that make morality more important? If measured by their usefulness to mankind, science may be more profound but morality is more essential.

Add your answer

Do you agree that Moral Truths are higher level or supersede Scientific truths/facts?

Example: you have two contradictory truths but you have to chose one.

- The scientific truth deals with the material world and so from your limited exposure and knowledge, it is a fact.

- But choosing the scientific factual truth leads to the extinction of human civilization.

- Whereas the moral Truth is more true because the ultimate truth is that which serves life. Starting from an individual level, to the family, to the community, nation, and human civilization. That is evolution. That is the ultimate Truth. That is at the core of who we are. Every other truth branches out from that fundamental truth.